On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 07:35:43PM +0000, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Followup to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > By author: Sam Ravnborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > > > To give some background info about why kbuild does what it does. > > A kernel being compiled partly with and partly without say -regparm=3 > > will result in a non-workable kernel. > > > > The same goes for a kernel that is partly built using gcc 2.96, partly > > using 3.3.4 for example. > > > > So kbuild pr. default will force a recompile for any .o file where > > opions to gcc differ, or name of gcc has changed. Today no check has > > been implemented to check the actual gcc executable timestamp - and > > neither is this planned. > > > > I would argue that "name of gcc has changed" is possibly a condition > that does more harm than good. It is just as frequently used to have > wrappers, like distcc, as it is to have different versions.
Disagree. I switch compilers all the time and kbuild does the right thing for me. I do occassionally feel your 'make install' pain and some sort of 'make __install' might be called for. -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
